guildwarsfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Guild Wars: Factions
Solid chp 2 Information Gaile Gray has been to LA numerous times talking about chapter 2 with people giving out hints and telling everyone some solid facts about it. Here are some links to those conversations (with appearences by the Frog too!): http://guildwars.gameamp.com/forum/showTopic/21406.php her latest visit, http://guildwars.gameamp.com/forum/showTopic/21329.php information overload, and there was one more but I cannot find it again. There is also a link to what I guess we can call rumored information: http://guildwars.gameamp.com/forum/showTopic/21391.php class and skill information. If the previous link is true, then I believe that newskills.txt link almost 100%. | Chuiu 20:12, 7 January 2006 (UTC) IMO a wiki shouldn't be the place for speculation or rumors. At least not in articles. Keep speculation on the talk pages. Only list things that are officially confirmed by ANet in interviews or on forums, with link to source as evidence. And only ANet, please. Your local EB dealer does not count as official, even if he claims to have insider information on the release date. ;) --Fisherman's Friend 09:12, 6 December 2005 (UTC) ---- Shandy replaced "first half of 2006" with "first quarter or second quarter of 2006". I reverted, because I wanted to use the exact same wording of Gaile Gray from the GameSpot interview. Furthermore, I don't see the difference between "first half" and "first or second quarter". 1/4 + 1/4 = 1/2 Isn't it? --Fisherman's Friend 09:23, 6 December 2005 (UTC) : Yeh but in gaming quarters are used 12:49, 6 December 2005 (UTC) ::In this case, they didn't use quarters (at least, not in the interview). I tend to agree with Fisherman's Friend; go with the published facts. I think we should only go with the "Q1 or Q2" if we can find an interview stating it that way. The "Q1 or Q2" technically means the same as "1st half"; but I think most people read "Q1 or Q2" as implying a Q1 target with a potential slip to Q2. As far as I know, this isn't what has been said in interviews (yet), so we should go with the "1st half" statement that they have clearly given. It implies a slightly longer wait, but is more realistic given the facts that we have available so far. --Barek 13:01, 6 December 2005 (UTC) :::When you hear about stuff coming out in 1st, 2nd, etc... quarter that is coming from a business/accounting report generally speaking. It has to do with companies (usually publically held ones) and the reporting that they have to do. They will try to spread the games they release out over the four annual quarters to keep their profits up and keep their shareholders happy. Since Gaile Gray can do more than read a pre-prepared press release, she stated it in more human terms, "first half of the year." :::As a side note Amazon.co.uk or whatever the UK version is called, has the second chapter listed. But I wouldn't trust their release date any more than I would one posted in a local game store. --Rainith 13:45, 6 December 2005 (UTC) ::::I agree. Shandy was an idiot to put that edit in there. He can't even find his source where he got 'first or second quarter' from. However, were he to find it he would include it again, as first or second quarter does imply an earlier release date than first half. He hadn't even read the gamespot interview when he made the edit. Fool. Shandy 10:11, 7 December 2005 (UTC) Rumor Mill Okay, THIS is the place for rumors and speculations! Let me start with one: The GameSpot interview quotes ANet: "We don't want to give away too much about the upcoming story, but count on seeing landscapes that have been irrevocably changed by world events, ..." I bet that we're going to Orr (or what is left of it ;))!! --Fisherman's Friend 01:20, 7 December 2005 (UTC) :Hehe. I was thinking of Orr myself, although who knows how navigable it will be... :They'd better add character slots or I'm going to be reeeally pissed off. — Lunarbunny 01:24, 7 December 2005 (UTC) :: Cantha Cantha Cantha --FireFox 07:11, 7 December 2005 (UTC) :::If between Ch.1 and Ch.2 they use a time seperator like the two years during the searing, which would seem likely, then almost any landscape could get changed in the interim. : I hate to burst your bubble, but during the pre-Winterday talk in LA, the frog specifically stated that the only way to visit Orr would be in SCUBA gear. Based upon that, I think it's highly likely that only Cantha will be available in Chapter 2. LordKestrel 18:37, 10 January 2006 (UTC) But, I do want it to be Orr and Cantha - I've been wanting to go to those locations! --Barek 11:55, 7 December 2005 (UTC) ::::The Frog mentioned Cantha in a recent talk, so that might be an option too, yes. But I'm 100% sure Orr will be included in Chapter Two too. Infact I believe the name "Orr" will be included in the final title of the expansion. Something like: "GuildWars II - The Ruins of Orr". --Fisherman's Friend 11:57, 7 December 2005 (UTC) :::::Gaile Gray was in Lion's Arch this morning (I'm sorting through my screenshots now); here are some comments: A Game magazine has a new interview, another two are coming in over the next two weeks, Chapter two is in Cantha, it'll have an asian theme, the story line is more open than this one, new PvP arenas, new professions (yes, plural), no one has level 12 rank yet, new looks to items and clothing, Chapter 2 is stand alone, but you can travel between the two lands if you own both, pre-order and beta events are coming sooner than you may think, there will be special pre-order items, be sure to get a promise for the pre-order package from your retailer if you want the pre-order items, we have no specific date yet, we will have more information next week (I missed if this was related to release date or beta event dates). She wouldn't give away how the storyline is connected - said that's part of the fun and we must wait. --Barek 13:00, 7 January 2006 (UTC) One of the magazines is CGW (Computer Gaming World if memory serves me) and info (and cover pic) can be found here. :The game magazine is indeed CGW, someone posted a transcript of the article, http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/showthread.php?p=857451 is a good summary. The new other class will be ritualist, they give a ton of new skills (but not the same as in below text file) as well as tons of info on new content and PvP options. Someone should get hold of a hard copy of the magazine just to confirm the transcript is correct, but it looked quite believable. --Xeeron 21:03, 7 January 2006 (UTC) Someone has also posted, as a text file, a skill list here, I don't trust that at all, I could make a text file and put it up and say that those were new skills, but as this is the rumor mill, I figured I'd post it. --Rainith 18:59, 7 January 2006 (UTC) :Some of those skills in that list were mentioned in the CGW article, but not all the skills from the article are there, and there are several that weren't even hinted at in the article. In any case, no energy costs nor cast/recharge times were mentioned for any of the skills, so I tend to distrust that file, as well - or then its creator has some outstanding sources; a notion which I'm inclined to discard immediately. --Sorya 11:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC) I'm gonna get myself this month's CGW, thank you. I'm pretty sure Tyria is the world... I doubt the Canthan Ferry Captain would say "While the northern powers fear the influence of powerful guilds, '''Cantha recognizes the value that many guilds bring to Tyria." if Cantha were not part of Tyria. — Lunarbunny 21:36, 7 January 2006 (UTC) :Technically, Cantha and Tyria seem to occupy the same "planet" per se as travel between them is by ship, but Cantha seems to be a different "continent" than Tyria. To put things in regular human terms. :) --Karlos 22:54, 7 January 2006 (UTC) ::I guess if you twist it a little, the ferry captain is saying that Cantha is nice enough to host something otherwise illegal for Tyrians. I think I'll start my own offshore corporation for creating guerilla organizations that operate in the U.S., providing transportation to and shelter at corporately owned islands at any time necessary. I will also provide a system for groups formed by my corporation to settle their differences on these islands. ;) — Lunarbunny 03:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC) :::Does anyone have a copy of the magazine? In one of the notes that I saw copied from it, the article mentioned the world of Tyria, and the continent of Ascalon. This was news to me; but it would explain some of the confusion if true. Can anyone confirm this was in the magazine? --Barek 02:53, 11 January 2006 (UTC) ::::From the Gamespy Article: Guild Wars: Factions will take place on the same world as Tyria, the location of the first game, but on the continent of Cantha; note how it says "the same world as Tyria", not "the same world of Tyria". This implies that Tyria is just a continent in the world. Also, in the game manual, it has a picture marked "map of Tyria" - that's a map of TYRIA, not Cantha. Kidburla 11:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC) '''Unconfirmed Release Date A possible release date for chapter two has slipped out, thanks to Amazon.com. The possible date is set for March 31, 2006. You can see the site for yourself at http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0009WXQJ6/202-2676261-2433403 this link. No news from NCSoft yet as to weather this date is accurate or not. --AeSiR oDiN 11:38, 7 December 2005 (UTC) :From what I've seen of Amozon posted release dates in the past, I only give it a 50% chance of being right. Still, if other sources can back up that date, it's great news! --Barek 11:55, 7 December 2005 (UTC) ::Oh, pleeeeease, no! Game retailers tend to give rather optimistic extimates of release dates, because they want people to preorder. DO NOT, EVER, TRUST RELEASE DATES GIVEN BY GAMES RETAILERS. No matter if they claim to have insider info. Usually you get a pretty accurate estimate of the release date if you take the remaining time from today until the official release date given by the developer/publisher and multiply it x 1.5. (Unless the game we're talking about is Duke Nukem Forever. In that case multiply x 25. :D) --Fisherman's Friend 11:57, 7 December 2005 (UTC) :::GG Transcript, 1/23: Gaile Gray: No release dates, I'm sorry. Spring, 2006. Which is a good thing, and better than 2nd Quarter, which everyone thought... Gaile Gray: ... was June 30th. :::Thus, I deduce the release date is going to be... July First!!!!! *runs away* -PanSola 15:24, 23 January 2006 (UTC) move or add redirect? According to the Official GW homepage, Guild Wars: Factions is now the working title of chapter 2. Should we move this article, or make a new article that points here (since working titles can change, and "Chapter Two" serves as a more consistent label for the next release, even if it's no longer the working title). -PanSola 05:44, 10 January 2006 (UTC) :I was about to ask the same question. Since that is the confirmed official title, I'd say we move the article to Guild Wars: Factions and make Chapter Two, Chapter 2 and Factions redirects. --Fisherman's Friend 06:20, 10 January 2006 (UTC) ::Agreed. --Karlos 06:24, 10 January 2006 (UTC) :::/signed, as the kids say. --Nunix 06:26, 10 January 2006 (UTC) ::::Done. Kidburla 06:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC) Copyrighted CGW content I don't mean to be the devil's advocate, but I have to point out that per ANet's request all major GW websites have removed detailed info that has been copied from the CGW article from their news and forums, as it is supposed to be exclusive for CGW and copyrighted. I reckon as soon as the January issue is no longer for sale the content will be free to quote, but for now we should refrain from adding all the details to GuildWiki. --Fisherman's Friend 06:47, 10 January 2006 (UTC) :Technically it's the Feb issue. I think it's safe to add "New skills for existing professions" w/o describing the professions ::On the one hand, I always get iffy about "exclusives" because, well, it's just some text. Freedom of information, and all that. On the other, I'd prefer none of this go up at all until it's in the game. Thankfully, if history is any judge, someone will pipe up with strong objections one way or the other and by the time we finish arguing about it, the expansion'll be out. ;p But if you check the GWG thread, Gray seems fine with reporting the content as long as it's not a direct copy of the article. --Nunix 07:26, 10 January 2006 (UTC) :::Yes, the thread on the GWG forums is pretty detailed, and Gaile Gray doesn't seems to mind. I'm not sure if CGW magazine would be just as relaxed. It is really hard to draw the line. We should keep an eye on the page, as people will add more details. Pretty soon the page will probably be linked from the Main Page. At that point we may have to make it write-protected, otherwise it'll be anarchy, with people addding all kinds of rumors, demands, hoaxes, questions, ... --Fisherman's Friend 08:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC) ::::We did two things which I think cover the issue: a) we attributed the info to CGW and b) we did not redistribute the article in part or whole. I believe we are in the clear. --Karlos 08:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC) "2" new professions That language made it sound like the number of new professions is exactly two. If that is not the case, I suggest rewording to "at least two new professions" or just "new professions" to keep the number open. :I haven't read the article, but from what people have said (not an incredibly reliable source, I know) it is 2, no more, no less. --Rainith 00:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC) ::The CGW article specifically says "two" new professions. --Fisherman's Friend 05:33, 11 January 2006 (UTC) :::The GameSpy feature is even clearer about it: "The original 6 classes will ... be present in Factions and all future retail releases. Each release will also sport '''two' new professions ..."'' -- 11:29, 12 January 2006 (UTC) I've read the article, and it said there will be 6 new armor sets for the old professions, not 5. Now I attempted to correct this (I had forgot to log in, though), but only minutes later it had been changed back to 5. I'll leave it at this. --Sorya 04:13, 11 January 2006 (UTC) :Sorry, there was an edit conflict (i.e. you made your edit while I made mine) and I overwrote the 6 with the old 5. I put the 6 (CGW: "Half a dozend") back in now. --Fisherman's Friend 05:33, 11 January 2006 (UTC) I disagree calling it a Beta Weekend Event Anet didn't call it Beta Weekend Event. For all we know the PvP portion could've still been in alpha or considered "gold". No need to use a previously used term and stick it in here. There also might be other events that Anet decide to call Beta Weekend Events, which might get distinguished from this event (called the PvP Weekend Event). If anything this is more similar to the World Preview Event. THE BWE was a recurring thing (which doesn't mean future BWEs, if they exist, have to e recurring, but just to point out which event this one in particular is more similar to). Thoughts? -PanSola 04:35, 11 January 2006 (UTC) :This is a minor thing to me. Feel free to edit the article and use ANet's original wording. --Fisherman's Friend 05:34, 11 January 2006 (UTC) Factions My understanding was that the two new Factions (Luxon and Kurzick) played more prominently into PvE than PvP. From what I've read, the PvE player must choose a faction, and in several missions/quests they actually compete against other teams who chose the other faction in attempting to complete the mission or quest's goals. I wanted to confirm before I adjusted the wording on the article. --Barek 10:19, 11 January 2006 (UTC) :I think we can safely assume that Factions will play an important role in both PvP and PvE. :Tricky question: If two human teams compete in attempting to complete a PvE mission or quest's goals, is that PvE or PvP? Let's call it PvEvP. ;) --Fisherman's Friend 10:25, 11 January 2006 (UTC) ::Ditto fisherman's fiend's question. I think what we are going to get is that the Storyline Mission sbecomes more than just PvE missions, but also include PvP missions. -PanSola 10:28, 11 January 2006 (UTC) :::I agree. My comment here was just because the article currently subcategorizes Factions under "New PvP/GvG features", but the Factions should probably be their own top level confirmed feature. I'll make the update; revert and discuss further if there's disagreement on how I read the talk here. --Barek 10:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC) I kind of like the incorporation of PvP into the storyline. The original storyline was lacking in an aspect: dynamicism. Although they may be the same missions, hopefully the PvP incorporation to the storyline in Factions adds some variation to them. Hopefully we don't end up with any IWAY type crap. — Lunarbunny 01:54, 19 January 2006 (UTC) Redirect or not? Is there an agreement on keeping all Chapter 2 info on this page, till the game becomes playable (which might be as soon as tomorrow)? There are many Chapter 2 related articles springing up right now, I would like to make them all redirects to this page. Anyone disagreeing? --Xeeron 09:30, 12 January 2006 (UTC) :Disagree. I don't think that the growing mass of Information concerning Guild Wars: Factions could possibly be summarized on one page. And it is playable for the first time (at leas parts of it ) beginning on 20 January 2006... --Si Tacuisses 09:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC) ::I disagree with Xeeron and agree with Si Tacuisses. Even now, when there is not much known yet, it is already too much info to keep it all on one page. And over the next few weeks the amount of info will explode. Very soon we will have the preview event, and we will have detailed information for hundreds' (literally) of new articles. ::I see Guild Wars: Factions as the entrance portal for all Chapter Two info, kinda like what the Main Page is for Chapter One. It is a summary and a menu with links to articles for more detailed info. That role may change when Ch2 is release. At that point we will probably integrate the chapter two info into the Main Page somehow. -- 10:02, 12 January 2006 (UTC) :::I agree that the information can already be spread to new articles, too much to be contained just here. However, I would recommend adding either a category or a template that can be used on all articles that are introduced in GW-F. I think this will become more useful to tag and group related articles; especially when future chapters also begin to be released. --Barek 11:02, 12 January 2006 (UTC) ::::Somebody (cough cough ;)) wrote a draft for such a template yesterday: Template:Factions Does this go into the direction that you had in mind, Barek? -- 11:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC) :::::LOL - that's what I get for not searching before posting :-) Yes, that works for me. What is the status on converting from "draft" to "in use"? --Barek 11:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC) ::::::Hehe, I don't blame you. Sometimes the new stuff comes in quicker than I can hit "Refresh" on the Recent Changes page. A small template like this is easily overlooked. :) ::::::The template is free to use when it's been reviewed and discussed by a few more people. But the nice thing about a template is that we can add the preliminary version to all Ch2 articles now and when the template is changed later (based on discussion results) all Ch2 pages will be updated automatically. -- 12:02, 12 January 2006 (UTC) Acess keys? "This worldwide eventâ€”scheduled for January 20 through 22â€”is open to both existing Guild Wars players and to those who do not have a Guild Wars account. ArenaNet is distributing free access keys to the event at http://www.guildwars.com." -GW site. Any one know where these access keys would be found? :They will be distributing them on Friday on their site (www.guildwars.com). Since they're located on the west coast of the US, I'd guess they'll put the info up there sometime Friday PST. i.e. You have at least 4 hours. --Rainith 23:26, 12 January 2006 (UTC) ::Oops, it's next weekend, not this weekend. So you have probably 7 days before they post the keys. --Rainith 00:20, 13 January 2006 (UTC) :::The event is next weekend, but the keys will be distributed this weekend (actually: TODAY!). Quoting GW.com: "Keys will be distributed on this website and through various partners starting on Friday, January 13th." -- 02:55, 13 January 2006 (UTC) Access keys are up on main Guild Wars site!! Apparently existing GW owners don't need the access keys (unless to make a new account). --TheSpectator 16:38, 13 January 2006 (UTC) :Access keys are listed in Guild Wars: Factions Global Free-for-All PvP Weekend (as the main site says to share). --Rainith 16:46, 13 January 2006 (UTC) :::Ahh yes, I understand why now. For some reason, I kept thinking of the two articles as one topic. I guess I'm really hyped up for it. :) --TheSpectator 18:00, 13 January 2006 (UTC) The chapter stands alone? o.o so it's pretty useless that i bought the chpater 1 since all the old jobs and armors will be offered in the chapter 2? i thought i would be more like a add-on or expansion or whatever...which requires the "original".....*sigh* :If you only have chapter 2, you won't be able to go through the chapter 1 areas. (At least, that's how I perceived the information). --TheSpectator 00:18, 14 January 2006 (UTC) ::There are also some skills for the core (chapter 1) classes that will not be available if you only buy chapter 2. And come on, if you didn't have fun playing chapter 1, why in the world would you buy chapter 2? And if you did have fun playing chapter 1, what are you complaining about? --Rainith 01:12, 14 January 2006 (UTC) :::I need to finally write my "Guild Wars is Magic: the MMO" article so people have a grasp on this kinda thing. Chapter 2 is - FROM WHAT I CAN TELL and let's be real, folks, very little solid information has come our way - the equivalent of a new block/set of Magic the Gathering cards. There'll be some new mechanics, you'll see some cards (or their equivalents) repeated, and some will be phased out; that is to say, some C1 skills will be carried over, as a kind of "core set" and some will be left out for whatever reason (balance, redundancy, et cetera). If you already have C1 cards (skills) in your deck (known) you can still use those skills (for the time being; MTG competition does regularly cycle out old cards after a couple of blocks have gone by). The whole chapter 1/chapter 2 nomenclature is bunk. I wish they would've just stuck to the TCG meme, but I guess they need those WOW bucks. --Nunix 03:26, 14 January 2006 (UTC) ::::We cant tell yet, whether all chapter 1 skills will be available in chapter 2. ANet only said that the 6 professions from Ch1 would become core professions, they did not yet say anything about skills. It might be that "all ch1 skills"="core skills", but it might also be that some skills are only available to ch1 accounts. --Xeeron 11:41, 14 January 2006 (UTC) New Gods? Speculation on my part, but take a look at this image at IGN: img_3316315. I've only seen massive murals for Gods in Guild Wars, so it tells me that this is either a new god or a new rendition of a current god (Grenth, Balthazar or ... Grenthazar?). Grenthazar is the cool new god. Worship him well! I've lost all scope of what I was talking about now. | Chuiu 16:01, 17 January 2006 (UTC) :Might as well be an old emperor or someone else. Oh, and there are murals of the Serpents in Chapter One. -- 16:24, 17 January 2006 (UTC) CGW article So I picked up the issue of CGW that has the GW:Factions stuff in it last night and there were a couple of things that caught my attention. Of course the only one that I can remember today is that at one point they stated that the name of the world was Tyria and the name of the continent that chapter 1 took place on was Ascalon. Now this may not be info straight from the developers, it may just be what the author of the article believed to be true after playing chapter 1, but I thought it worth pointing out with some of the discussion going on in the Rumor Mill. --Rainith 11:56, 18 January 2006 (UTC) :Either ANet had a major shift in their perception of the game world (all this time Krtyas were fighting Ascalons when they themselves were Ascalons?) or (more likely), the reporter has not played the game enough to fully comprehend the relationship of the areas to each other. --Karlos 12:03, 18 January 2006 (UTC) ::Or it could be a issue of perspective. Most people in the USA consider themselves to be "Americans" but people in Canada are "Canadians", in Mexico are "Mexicans", in Peru are "Peruvians", etc... but all those countries are part of North and South America. Just a thought, I agree you are probably right and the author never played past Ascalon. --Rainith 12:10, 18 January 2006 (UTC) :::Well, we already have Cantha the continent and Cantha the nation, so it's not inconceivable that there's Ascalon the continent vs Ascalon the nation. Or for that matter, Tyria the world and Tyria the continent... At a recent LA appearance (1/23), Gaile Gray said that "two lower-level arenas will remain on the Tyrian Continent:". At a different appearance (1/21), she said "The gold standard remains across all of Tyria, the world.". I don't know what the context was in, but my personal deduction is in response of some question like "Will Cantha be using a different currency?". :::So there we have it, there's Tyria the world, which includes Cantha the continent (which also contains Cantha the nation) and Tyria the continent (which might also be called Ascalon the continent, and which contains Ascalon the nation). -PanSola 14:33, 23 January 2006 (UTC) New armor type count Currently the article says 6 new armor types, which kinda imply only one per profession. Where is the source of that info? I know new armor are coming, but never heard about numbers. -PanSola 18:54, 14 February 2006 (CST) :CGW Article, and I believe it was 6 per prefession. --FireFox 06:15, 16 February 2006 (CST) ::So should it say "6 new armor types for each of the old and new professons"? Right now it felt like 6 total... -PanSola 06:27, 16 February 2006 (CST) Factions trailer link I believe that the link I just posted is from the official Korean site, but since I can't understand Korean I'm not 100% sure. If it is not from the official site it should probably be taken down. If we're lucky it will be put up on guildwars.com today (cause the download speed from that link sucks). Very pretty looking tho. --Rainith 16:41, 21 February 2006 (CST) :www.guildwars.co.kr is the official Korean GW website, so I take it the video has been officially released and we are safe if we post it. Perhaps Korea got it ahead of time of www.guildwars.com because of the their time zone. :) Anyway ... nice video. I added some mirrors with better performance. -- 20:32, 21 February 2006 (CST) the colon I noticed only the old press release use "Guild Wars: Factions", newer stuff on the official website and on other gaming sites now just use "Guild Wars Factions". Suggest either a move or a redirect from the other direction. -PanSola 01:38, 8 March 2006 (CST) :I beleive it looks better with the colon :p -- 01:55, 8 March 2006 (CST) ::Suggest we confirm this. Either with a press release on their site or something. --Karlos 17:08, 8 March 2006 (CST) :::ANet aren't consistent themselves. In some places on the official website it's spelled with collon, in other places without collon. -- 20:37, 8 March 2006 (CST) ::::In the GWF faq and in the latest press release it is referred to as "Guild Wars Factions." I prefer it with the colon though, but for now it seems as if A.Net has done away with it. --Ravious 22:00, 8 March 2006 (CST) :::::Lets defy the powers-that-are and keep the colon. ::Looks around anxiously and runs away:: --Xeeron 23:02, 8 March 2006 (CST) ::::::I think in the pre-order box that I got last night the colon was used in the docs, I could be wrong though, I'll verify tonight. --Rainith 01:09, 9 March 2006 (CST) :::::::Ok, verified that there is no colon (or spleen for that matter) between Guild Wars and Faction in any of the documents included with the pre-order box. In fact the copyright notice specifically states "Guild Wars Factions" as one of the copyrights. If we do move this page, I think we should keep the redirect (just my personal opinion). --Rainith 10:54, 9 March 2006 (CST)